Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
mercalia
Posts: 14036
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby mercalia » 31 Jul 2020, 3:41pm

[XAP]Bob wrote:They *should* be described in another way. Why aren’t they pair 23?

No other chromosome has a name related to such a minor part of its function, and the naming is actively unhelpful.


have you any idea what the other 96% do? would be interesting to know. I would hardly describe the 4% minor if thats all thats needed to do the job?

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 18367
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby Vorpal » 1 Aug 2020, 10:10am

mercalia wrote:
[XAP]Bob wrote:They *should* be described in another way. Why aren’t they pair 23?

No other chromosome has a name related to such a minor part of its function, and the naming is actively unhelpful.


have you any idea what the other 96% do? would be interesting to know. I would hardly describe the 4% minor if thats all thats needed to do the job?

It's not, though. While defining sexual characteristics typically come from those genes mainly associated with sex, others (or their lack) might not influence it at all, depsite being associated with sex or sexual development in some way.

I think the WHO have a pretty good explanation on their website, and also identify the aspects of gender that are associated with culture, rather than science. https://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

mercalia
Posts: 14036
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby mercalia » 15 Aug 2020, 9:30am

An interesting article from the Spectator

What explains the rising number of children with gender issues? ( the social contagion theory)

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/do-tv-characters-of-old-transwomen-really-influence-the-gender-of-young-girls-?

Altissima
Posts: 27
Joined: 4 Jun 2016, 12:11pm

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby Altissima » 15 Aug 2020, 5:31pm

Here is an interesting article on the incidence of left-handedness and how left handed people have been treated worldwide. Spot the similarity with the way that Trans people are similarly treated

https://www.rightleftrightwrong.com/his ... ment%20for

Altissima
Posts: 27
Joined: 4 Jun 2016, 12:11pm

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby Altissima » 15 Aug 2020, 5:52pm

And here is a Telegraph article which gives a fascinating insight into the possible reasons for the dramatic rise in the contagion of left-handedness;

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews ... arply.html

mercalia
Posts: 14036
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby mercalia » 17 Aug 2020, 8:57am

seems like some police forces are using attitudes to transgender issues to reject candidates

Two police forces are slammed after refusing job applications from candidates who ­believe people cannot change biological sex

A woman who enquired about a role at Norfolk Constabulary was told the job would not be suitable for her because of her 'gender critical' views.

Her application to another force in the southeast was unsuccessful after she made it clear she does not believe a person can physically transition to the opposite sex.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8632995/Two-police-forces-slammed-refusing-job-applications-candidates-gender-critical-views.html


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/15/british-police-forces-not-welcoming-gender-critical-job-applications/

The revelation came after a serving police officer of 16 years anonymously emailed internal recruitment teams at 26 forces that were advertising for ­future constables.

Altissima
Posts: 27
Joined: 4 Jun 2016, 12:11pm

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby Altissima » 19 Aug 2020, 2:12pm

Seems reasonable to me. The Equality Act 2010 has after all been law for 10 years. Would it be reasonable to have police officers who recognise some laws or parts thereof but not others?

User avatar
simonineaston
Posts: 3430
Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
Location: Live & work in Briz'l

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby simonineaston » 19 Aug 2020, 2:54pm

It's all very well wanting to change sex and to behave like a member of the other sex once the necessary arrangements have been made, however the very fact that a transition is required is a clear indication that the person involved is making challenging & artificial changes in order to be more like the other. If it were possible to be the other, the difficult, lengthy and unpleasant process of transition would not be required.
However the surgeon's knife and a cabinet of chemicals doesn't mean you become the other, it just means you become more like the other... On that basis, while I respect anyone's decision to follow that route, but it doesn't mean they can fairly compete in the other's sports.
ttfn, Simon in Easton
(currently enjoying a Moulton TSR & a nano Brompton...)

mercalia
Posts: 14036
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby mercalia » 23 Aug 2020, 4:41pm

what do you think of this story from the USA

Drew Adams, a trans man, has spent the past three years fighting for transgender students to be allowed to use bathrooms at school that match their gender identity.

It came about after Drew, at the age of 14, was told by his school in Florida that he wasn't allowed to use the men's bathroom.

A federal court has now ruled in Drew's favour in the first US trial involving a transgender student's access to bathrooms. The ruling applies to Florida, Georgia and Alabama.


Though I sympathise with the person I think the law is an ass. The correct soln is a bathroom for trans people. If I were a girl and there was this trans-girl in the girls bathroom I would create a fuss: they can think of themselves how they want but I dont have to accept it and regard them as one of us girls ( my constitutional right? comment?)

It seems the school had gender neutral facilities. Maybe they need to be labeled only for trans people.


The judge found Drew was singled out for different treatment due to being trans - and said public schools may not "harm transgender students by establishing arbitrary, separate rules for their restroom use".

well yes and no - girls and boys are treated different from one another so why not trans-people from them also?( I mentioned an article some way back how in India they recognise a third gender legally) ( it hinges on whether a trans-x is an x) so a dubious judgement. I hope it goes all the way to the US Supreme court.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-53834065

This isnt the first case to go to court in the USA The person who plays the character "Dreamer" in the DC Comic universe Supergirl is a trans-woman and did the same to her school ( and won in the Maine Supreme Court - some one care to explain about this local supreme court and presumably the federal one?). I hope we dont go down this road

https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/supergirl-actor-nicole-maines-nia-nal-dreamer-trans-rights-equality-1203537511/

pwa
Posts: 12725
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby pwa » 23 Aug 2020, 6:04pm

Altissima wrote:Seems reasonable to me. The Equality Act 2010 has after all been law for 10 years. Would it be reasonable to have police officers who recognise some laws or parts thereof but not others?

I confess to being in a bit of a dilemma over the question of legal rights verses personal beliefs. The current prevailing climate is one of Illiberal Liberalism (not my own phrase but it sums it up) in which thoughts that are not in tune with the dominant world view are crushed. If one believes that gay sex is wrong (and I don't), better keep quiet about it because making that public will harm your job prospects. Likewise, if you think that changing sex is impossible, better not tell anyone you think that either, or you'll get the wave of ire that JK Rowling got. Some "liberals" out there don't tolerate dissent.

I imagine every single police officer there has ever been will have had to enforce a law they don't particularly agree with. Being in the police means putting your own beliefs to one side, to some extent. Why should it be different in this case?

thelawnet
Posts: 2422
Joined: 27 Aug 2010, 12:56am

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby thelawnet » 2 Sep 2020, 12:49am

[XAP]Bob wrote:Worth dropping this in...


Yes, it's amazing the lengths that people go to obfuscate and deny simple facts.

There were a remarkable number of strawmen and misleading claims there.

The Y chromosome is the male chromosome and it's really as simple as that. We have 22 pairs of identical chromosomes, and the 23rd is non-identical, with Y having evolved from X to signal male sex.

It really doesn't have another function. These are called sex chromosomes because they differ between sexes, because they are the only pair that are non-identical, and because the presence of the Y chromosome signals sex. Other sex chromosome systems in other organisms, such as the female chromosome being sex-determining in birds, or males having only one sex chromosome, are also sex chromosomes.

In an X0 system the X chromosome IS the sex chromosome because 2 Xs is female and 1 X is male. Thus an X0 bat species might have 17 identical pairs of chromosome and either 1 (male) or 2 identical (female) sex chromosomes.

The fact that the sex chromosome doesn't only determine sex and sex-related genes are found on other chromosomes doesn't change the fact that the sex chromosomes are the ones that differ between and determine sex, hence we call them sex chromosomes, unless we are disingenuous people trying to conflate politics with science.

Much of the rest of this talk was trying to exaggerate the importance of past scientific errors in order to push political points.

Sexual reproduction involves a binary set of female and male gametes meeting to produce a new organism. Male violence seems to be linked to testosterone, which is produced by testes, signalled for by the Y chromosome. That someone incorrectly thought the Y chromosome itself led to aggression doesn't change the fact that the Y chromosome does signal male sex, and male sex is linked to aggression.

Even a dog owner could see that castrating their dog reduces aggression.

Athletes with androgen insensitivity, testes and XY chromosomes ARE biologically male. They are ALSO female in the sense that we may perceive them as female, which is a word that meant something for millennia before we could analyse DNA, and find out that a barren woman was in some cases in fact biologically male. Androgen insensitivity is not something that can be measured exactly, and most athletes with androgen insensitivity get SOME benefit from testosterone, but they don't respond to it as well as normal males or females. However they are many times overrepresented in female sport, and this is because of their biological maleness. So to assert that the social sense in which someone who appears to be female but is biologically male, is female (which they are, throughout history), is necessarily the sense that we should adopt for sport is quite dishonest.

To further assert that someone who doesn't appear convincingly female, is biologically male, but has merely said 'I say I am female, therefore I am' following male puberty, and despite our eyes telling us otherwise, is in the sporting sense female is ludicrous, since sport is based on a strict biological division between males and females, or in some cases 'males under 50kg', 'males 50-60kg', etc. Because of the different levels of hormone produced in male and female gonads, a mediocre male is still stronger than an elite female, so any sporting spectacle that does not take into account specifically the sex steroids and their effects on the developing human body renders the division between male and female sporting categories pointless.

There might not be a fairness imperative that says we should prevent athletes who have always 'been' female while also being biologically males from competing in female sport, but that really would depend on the size of any advantage, amount of overrpresentation, etc. For example someone with a genetic disorder who 'is' female while being biologically male, but who is as fast as elite males probably should not be allowed to compete as female. However, mere overrepresentation of biologically male people with genetic disorders isn't necessarily disqualifying if they do not possess strength/speed BEYOND elite females.

That's different from people who merely assert their femaleness while having been aware from an early age of the fact of their biological male status, in that there doesn't seem to be a fairness issue that they must be allowed to compete in a division based on biology, not feelings.

windmiller
Posts: 619
Joined: 9 Feb 2009, 5:10pm

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby windmiller » 2 Sep 2020, 7:06am

thelawnet wrote:
[XAP]Bob wrote:Worth dropping this in...


Yes, it's amazing the lengths that people go to obfuscate and deny simple facts.

There were a remarkable number of strawmen and misleading claims there.

The Y chromosome is the male chromosome and it's really as simple as that. We have 22 pairs of identical chromosomes, and the 23rd is non-identical, with Y having evolved from X to signal male sex.

It really doesn't have another function. These are called sex chromosomes because they differ between sexes, because they are the only pair that are non-identical, and because the presence of the Y chromosome signals sex. Other sex chromosome systems in other organisms, such as the female chromosome being sex-determining in birds, or males having only one sex chromosome, are also sex chromosomes.

In an X0 system the X chromosome IS the sex chromosome because 2 Xs is female and 1 X is male. Thus an X0 bat species might have 17 identical pairs of chromosome and either 1 (male) or 2 identical (female) sex chromosomes.

The fact that the sex chromosome doesn't only determine sex and sex-related genes are found on other chromosomes doesn't change the fact that the sex chromosomes are the ones that differ between and determine sex, hence we call them sex chromosomes, unless we are disingenuous people trying to conflate politics with science.

Much of the rest of this talk was trying to exaggerate the importance of past scientific errors in order to push political points.

Sexual reproduction involves a binary set of female and male gametes meeting to produce a new organism. Male violence seems to be linked to testosterone, which is produced by testes, signalled for by the Y chromosome. That someone incorrectly thought the Y chromosome itself led to aggression doesn't change the fact that the Y chromosome does signal male sex, and male sex is linked to aggression.

Even a dog owner could see that castrating their dog reduces aggression.

Athletes with androgen insensitivity, testes and XY chromosomes ARE biologically male. They are ALSO female in the sense that we may perceive them as female, which is a word that meant something for millennia before we could analyse DNA, and find out that a barren woman was in some cases in fact biologically male. Androgen insensitivity is not something that can be measured exactly, and most athletes with androgen insensitivity get SOME benefit from testosterone, but they don't respond to it as well as normal males or females. However they are many times overrepresented in female sport, and this is because of their biological maleness. So to assert that the social sense in which someone who appears to be female but is biologically male, is female (which they are, throughout history), is necessarily the sense that we should adopt for sport is quite dishonest.

To further assert that someone who doesn't appear convincingly female, is biologically male, but has merely said 'I say I am female, therefore I am' following male puberty, and despite our eyes telling us otherwise, is in the sporting sense female is ludicrous, since sport is based on a strict biological division between males and females, or in some cases 'males under 50kg', 'males 50-60kg', etc. Because of the different levels of hormone produced in male and female gonads, a mediocre male is still stronger than an elite female, so any sporting spectacle that does not take into account specifically the sex steroids and their effects on the developing human body renders the division between male and female sporting categories pointless.

There might not be a fairness imperative that says we should prevent athletes who have always 'been' female while also being biologically males from competing in female sport, but that really would depend on the size of any advantage, amount of overrpresentation, etc. For example someone with a genetic disorder who 'is' female while being biologically male, but who is as fast as elite males probably should not be allowed to compete as female. However, mere overrepresentation of biologically male people with genetic disorders isn't necessarily disqualifying if they do not possess strength/speed BEYOND elite females.

That's different from people who merely assert their femaleness while having been aware from an early age of the fact of their biological male status, in that there doesn't seem to be a fairness issue that they must be allowed to compete in a division based on biology, not feelings.


At first the "debate" was about how gender and sex were not related. Then the biological science became an inconvenient fact, So language had to be censored and changed in order for the science to be policed to fit the new ideological narrative. The whole thing has become a mess and ultimately will only regress LGBT rights and acceptance which has already been in place for some time now.

thelawnet
Posts: 2422
Joined: 27 Aug 2010, 12:56am

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby thelawnet » 2 Sep 2020, 8:59am

Biological science isn't so much an inconvenient fact as a tool to push an agenda.

There isn't really a difference between people saying that black people have lower IQs and are therefore inferior at a genetic level, and those who argue that because rare genetic mutations might cause, say, someone with testes to appear female, that being male or female is somehow an arbitrary thing and lah lah lah hand waving oh dear how can we possibly tell that this 6' convicted rapist is not really a woman?

In both cases the evidence is fitted to the conclusion, and there's not really a difference in that sense between racists claiming science proves their racism and people like those in the video claiming that sex is somehow not really a binary concept fundamental to our existence, and how dare we talk about sex chromosomes, because of a few points carefully selected with far more ignored

The idea that science is some sort of checkmate winning victory was used to justify mass murder and eugenics in the 20th century. In the past science was also used to claim for instance that homosexuality was wrong because of scientific reasons.

We should be suspicious of people claiming that science proves their beliefs, where those beliefs appear illogical, unless we ourselves understand the science beyond the pop version presented to advance their specific point of view.

mercalia
Posts: 14036
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby mercalia » 2 Sep 2020, 12:12pm

windmiller wrote:
thelawnet wrote:
[XAP]Bob wrote:Worth dropping this in...


Yes, it's amazing the lengths that people go to obfuscate and deny simple facts.

There were a remarkable number of strawmen and misleading claims there.

The Y chromosome is the male chromosome and it's really as simple as that. We have 22 pairs of identical chromosomes, and the 23rd is non-identical, with Y having evolved from X to signal male sex.

It really doesn't have another function. These are called sex chromosomes because they differ between sexes, because they are the only pair that are non-identical, and because the presence of the Y chromosome signals sex. Other sex chromosome systems in other organisms, such as the female chromosome being sex-determining in birds, or males having only one sex chromosome, are also sex chromosomes.

In an X0 system the X chromosome IS the sex chromosome because 2 Xs is female and 1 X is male. Thus an X0 bat species might have 17 identical pairs of chromosome and either 1 (male) or 2 identical (female) sex chromosomes.

The fact that the sex chromosome doesn't only determine sex and sex-related genes are found on other chromosomes doesn't change the fact that the sex chromosomes are the ones that differ between and determine sex, hence we call them sex chromosomes, unless we are disingenuous people trying to conflate politics with science.

Much of the rest of this talk was trying to exaggerate the importance of past scientific errors in order to push political points.

Sexual reproduction involves a binary set of female and male gametes meeting to produce a new organism. Male violence seems to be linked to testosterone, which is produced by testes, signalled for by the Y chromosome. That someone incorrectly thought the Y chromosome itself led to aggression doesn't change the fact that the Y chromosome does signal male sex, and male sex is linked to aggression.

Even a dog owner could see that castrating their dog reduces aggression.

Athletes with androgen insensitivity, testes and XY chromosomes ARE biologically male. They are ALSO female in the sense that we may perceive them as female, which is a word that meant something for millennia before we could analyse DNA, and find out that a barren woman was in some cases in fact biologically male. Androgen insensitivity is not something that can be measured exactly, and most athletes with androgen insensitivity get SOME benefit from testosterone, but they don't respond to it as well as normal males or females. However they are many times overrepresented in female sport, and this is because of their biological maleness. So to assert that the social sense in which someone who appears to be female but is biologically male, is female (which they are, throughout history), is necessarily the sense that we should adopt for sport is quite dishonest.

To further assert that someone who doesn't appear convincingly female, is biologically male, but has merely said 'I say I am female, therefore I am' following male puberty, and despite our eyes telling us otherwise, is in the sporting sense female is ludicrous, since sport is based on a strict biological division between males and females, or in some cases 'males under 50kg', 'males 50-60kg', etc. Because of the different levels of hormone produced in male and female gonads, a mediocre male is still stronger than an elite female, so any sporting spectacle that does not take into account specifically the sex steroids and their effects on the developing human body renders the division between male and female sporting categories pointless.

There might not be a fairness imperative that says we should prevent athletes who have always 'been' female while also being biologically males from competing in female sport, but that really would depend on the size of any advantage, amount of overrpresentation, etc. For example someone with a genetic disorder who 'is' female while being biologically male, but who is as fast as elite males probably should not be allowed to compete as female. However, mere overrepresentation of biologically male people with genetic disorders isn't necessarily disqualifying if they do not possess strength/speed BEYOND elite females.

That's different from people who merely assert their femaleness while having been aware from an early age of the fact of their biological male status, in that there doesn't seem to be a fairness issue that they must be allowed to compete in a division based on biology, not feelings.


At first the "debate" was about how gender and sex were not related. Then the biological science became an inconvenient fact, So language had to be censored and changed in order for the science to be policed to fit the new ideological narrative. The whole thing has become a mess and ultimately will only regress LGBT rights and acceptance which has already been in place for some time now.



can you expand on this as a bit too compressed for me to understand

windmiller
Posts: 619
Joined: 9 Feb 2009, 5:10pm

Re: Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

Postby windmiller » 2 Sep 2020, 1:56pm

Hamstringing biological science with agenda based labels of racism and homophobia Is a well used tactic of those who want to slam the door on reasoned debate.